It's May 14, 2024, 07:46:54 PM
lol at blaming a religion for the advancement of science. blame the people, there was stupid fucks back then and theres stupid fucks now, dosent matter what time period you came from. there may of been advancements of science in the middle ages but only advancements that were minimal but still huge in that era. its like saying modern sceience has hindered the development of society now. nuclear bombs since there conception have threatened humanity and you could say hindered other science every since they were invented. i hate all this religion v science bullshit, no side is wrong on whichever side you sit on and no side is right. they both have there own views and beliefs. science once told us the earth was flat and we all know how that turned out.
By that logic 90% of all ancient figures should be taken into question. The Gospels are no less historical than the writings of Plato with regards to who Socrates was. Of course it doesn't even matter. Christ could not have said anything the Bible says but Christ the Teacher would still exist in the writings and his teachings would still have nothing to say about a flat earth or revolving around the sun.
Quote from: tempo2 on January 14, 2010, 03:32:47 AMlol at blaming a religion for the advancement of science. blame the people, there was stupid fucks back then and theres stupid fucks now, dosent matter what time period you came from. there may of been advancements of science in the middle ages but only advancements that were minimal but still huge in that era. its like saying modern sceience has hindered the development of society now. nuclear bombs since there conception have threatened humanity and you could say hindered other science every since they were invented. i hate all this religion v science bullshit, no side is wrong on whichever side you sit on and no side is right. they both have there own views and beliefs. science once told us the earth was flat and we all know how that turned out. They were stupid because church was feeding them bullshit, Copernicus would be murdered if he openly admitted he thought the earth revolved around the sun. Just look at this day and age, Christians are still holding back scientific advancements with all the complaining about stemcell research.Advancements that were minimal now but big back then?No there were practically none in comparison to every other era in human history.Quote from: Shallow on January 14, 2010, 07:43:32 AMBy that logic 90% of all ancient figures should be taken into question. The Gospels are no less historical than the writings of Plato with regards to who Socrates was. Of course it doesn't even matter. Christ could not have said anything the Bible says but Christ the Teacher would still exist in the writings and his teachings would still have nothing to say about a flat earth or revolving around the sun.True, scientist just piece together the puzzle to see what's most likely, what the bible says isn't likely.IN most cases you also have multiple sources which always gives more credit.Yes they are less historical, plato & socrates were writing from a objective perspective in contrast to the writers of the bible.Biblical stories are written in away some modern writers write, they see something happen and use it as a base for a fictional story.
Quote from: The Great Cornholio on January 14, 2010, 07:59:46 AMQuote from: tempo2 on January 14, 2010, 03:32:47 AMlol at blaming a religion for the advancement of science. blame the people, there was stupid fucks back then and theres stupid fucks now, dosent matter what time period you came from. there may of been advancements of science in the middle ages but only advancements that were minimal but still huge in that era. its like saying modern sceience has hindered the development of society now. nuclear bombs since there conception have threatened humanity and you could say hindered other science every since they were invented. i hate all this religion v science bullshit, no side is wrong on whichever side you sit on and no side is right. they both have there own views and beliefs. science once told us the earth was flat and we all know how that turned out. They were stupid because church was feeding them bullshit, Copernicus would be murdered if he openly admitted he thought the earth revolved around the sun. Just look at this day and age, Christians are still holding back scientific advancements with all the complaining about stemcell research.Advancements that were minimal now but big back then?No there were practically none in comparison to every other era in human history.Quote from: Shallow on January 14, 2010, 07:43:32 AMBy that logic 90% of all ancient figures should be taken into question. The Gospels are no less historical than the writings of Plato with regards to who Socrates was. Of course it doesn't even matter. Christ could not have said anything the Bible says but Christ the Teacher would still exist in the writings and his teachings would still have nothing to say about a flat earth or revolving around the sun.True, scientist just piece together the puzzle to see what's most likely, what the bible says isn't likely.IN most cases you also have multiple sources which always gives more credit.Yes they are less historical, plato & socrates were writing from a objective perspective in contrast to the writers of the bible.Biblical stories are written in away some modern writers write, they see something happen and use it as a base for a fictional story.Shows what you know. Socrates never wrote a fucking word.
Quote from: Shallow on January 13, 2010, 08:24:58 PMJesus as a teacher is not fictional. His life and teachings are documented. Embelished maybe in your mind but the teachings of Christ, aka Christianity, is what is at debate here. Your beef should be with Judaism, and Western Europe's adoption of that religion and paired with Chrsitianity. Jesus never mentioned what we should believe in or not believe in with regards to how the world works. He did everything but call Moses a liar. So a Christian could argue that true Christianty should put aside Judaism.documented by the bible, not a reliable sourcethere are external sources of his existance, but that's where it stops, his existance
Jesus as a teacher is not fictional. His life and teachings are documented. Embelished maybe in your mind but the teachings of Christ, aka Christianity, is what is at debate here. Your beef should be with Judaism, and Western Europe's adoption of that religion and paired with Chrsitianity. Jesus never mentioned what we should believe in or not believe in with regards to how the world works. He did everything but call Moses a liar. So a Christian could argue that true Christianty should put aside Judaism.
Quote from: Shallow on January 14, 2010, 08:48:22 AMQuote from: The Great Cornholio on January 14, 2010, 07:59:46 AMQuote from: tempo2 on January 14, 2010, 03:32:47 AMlol at blaming a religion for the advancement of science. blame the people, there was stupid fucks back then and theres stupid fucks now, dosent matter what time period you came from. there may of been advancements of science in the middle ages but only advancements that were minimal but still huge in that era. its like saying modern sceience has hindered the development of society now. nuclear bombs since there conception have threatened humanity and you could say hindered other science every since they were invented. i hate all this religion v science bullshit, no side is wrong on whichever side you sit on and no side is right. they both have there own views and beliefs. science once told us the earth was flat and we all know how that turned out. They were stupid because church was feeding them bullshit, Copernicus would be murdered if he openly admitted he thought the earth revolved around the sun. Just look at this day and age, Christians are still holding back scientific advancements with all the complaining about stemcell research.Advancements that were minimal now but big back then?No there were practically none in comparison to every other era in human history.Quote from: Shallow on January 14, 2010, 07:43:32 AMBy that logic 90% of all ancient figures should be taken into question. The Gospels are no less historical than the writings of Plato with regards to who Socrates was. Of course it doesn't even matter. Christ could not have said anything the Bible says but Christ the Teacher would still exist in the writings and his teachings would still have nothing to say about a flat earth or revolving around the sun.True, scientist just piece together the puzzle to see what's most likely, what the bible says isn't likely.IN most cases you also have multiple sources which always gives more credit.Yes they are less historical, plato & socrates were writing from a objective perspective in contrast to the writers of the bible.Biblical stories are written in away some modern writers write, they see something happen and use it as a base for a fictional story.Shows what you know. Socrates never wrote a fucking word.My bad, I meant the way they thought
Jesus (as the son of God) is fictional, so it isnt Jesus himself that stunts scientific growth. But being a true believer of Christianity also means being a non believer in certain scientific truths (evolution for example). That mentallity can only lead someone to believe that Christianity itself HAS stunted scientific growth.
What a stupid poster. For one the "dark" ages did have quite a bit of practical advancements happen with regards to technology. What was left behind in science had nothing to do with the religion, but rather the conquering feudal kings who felt they should do away with everything their once Roman masters held high. It wouldn't have mattered if Christianity existed or not. The Byzantine Empire still held strong in science ad math through out most of the Western dark ages and it was very Christian. The great Church Ayia Sofia is an architectural marvel and it was built in those terrible Christian years of no progress.
Quote from: Shallow on December 24, 2009, 10:43:18 AMWhat a stupid poster. For one the "dark" ages did have quite a bit of practical advancements happen with regards to technology. What was left behind in science had nothing to do with the religion, but rather the conquering feudal kings who felt they should do away with everything their once Roman masters held high. It wouldn't have mattered if Christianity existed or not. The Byzantine Empire still held strong in science ad math through out most of the Western dark ages and it was very Christian. The great Church Ayia Sofia is an architectural marvel and it was built in those terrible Christian years of no progress.So we have nice looking churches instead of time travel
Spirituality inspires me.organized religion disgusts me.
Quote from: rayallen0 on March 14, 2012, 09:46:32 PMSpirituality inspires me.organized religion disgusts me. it's become fashionable for some people to say " oh im not religious, but spiritual", as if yep i know of the negativety associated with calling myself 'religious', so i'll use the euphemism of 'spirituality' to be more accepted.what is spirituality? whenever I hear the word 'spirituality' my forehead gets closer to having a permanent frown on it. I haven't been given a definition that isn't abstract yet. it's as kooky and spooky as other religious concepts. It's seems like a word designed to create warm fuzzy feelings and goosebumps just like 'gaaawwwddd' without even become close to being discerned as to what the word actually means. The only spirits I can relate to is the drink I buy my mate or the presence of wet paint.